Important negotiations are underway at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in order to reform this international body, expanding its membership base to make it more representative of the international balance of power. Demands to bring in India and Brazil as permanent members and include African representation – South Africa and Nigeria are strong candidates – have gathered considerable momentum in the talks. Will the advocates of these demands succeed?
In some negotiations, there is a certain parity between the two sides, which makes it easier for them to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement. This was the case, for example, with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. The balance of nuclear power between the US and the Soviet Union was relatively even. In other negotiations, one side is not as strong as the other, as is the case with the never-ending negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel. The latter, as we know, is more powerful. It occupies the land, enjoys military superiority and has unflagging American backing, and therefore sees no reason to reach a just agreement with the Palestinians. Which of these two models applies to the negotiations between the permanent members of the UNSC and other countries over the expansion of UNSC membership?
In the manner of Israel’s negotiating approach with the Palestinians, the US is trying to drag on the negotiations over UNSC reform and void them of substance in order to forestall any diminishment of its influence in the council. So it has pushed to have the negotiations continue into the next session, which begins in September and which will ensure they will continue into next year. There are also reports that Washington plans to introduce a new initiative based on the proposal President Joe Biden made in the last session. The main points of that were that the new permanent members would not enjoy the right to veto, which should remain the exclusive privilege of the original five permanent members, that Africa would have a single seat on the council, not two, as the African group demands, and that the African member would be selected by the current permanent members. Naturally, the African group denounced such conditions as unfair. But the other side is more powerful. So will it succeed in voiding UNSC reform of substance, just as Israel has voided all negotiations with the Palestinians of meaning?
* A version of this article appears in print in the 13 July, 2023 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: